Introduction: The aim of this study was to develop consensus recommendations on safety parameters for mobilizing adult, mechanically ventilated, intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods: A systematic literature review was followed by a meeting of 23 multidisciplinary ICU experts to seek consensus regarding the safe mobilization of mechanically ventilated patients. Results: Safety considerations were summarized in four categories: respiratory, cardiovascular, neurological and other. Consensus was achieved on all criteria for safe mobilization, with the exception being levels of vasoactive agents. Intubation via an endotracheal tube was not a contraindication to early mobilization and a fraction of inspired oxygen less than 0.6 with a percutaneous oxygen saturation more than 90% and a respiratory rate less than 30 breaths/minute were considered safe criteria for in- and out-of-bed mobilization if there were no other contraindications. At an international meeting, 94 multidisciplinary ICU clinicians concurred with the proposed recommendations. Conclusion: Consensus recommendations regarding safety criteria for mobilization of adult, mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU have the potential to guide ICU rehabilitation whilst minimizing the risk of adverse events.

Introduction: The purpose of this trial was to investigate the effectiveness of an exercise rehabilitation program commencing during ICU admission and continuing into the outpatient setting compared with usual care on physical function and health-related quality of life in ICU survivors. Methods: We conducted a single-center, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial. One hundred and fifty participants were stratified and randomized to receive usual care or intervention if they were in the ICU for 5 days or more and had no permanent neurological insult. The intervention group received intensive exercises in the ICU and the ward and as outpatients. Participants were assessed at recruitment, ICU admission, hospital discharge and at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up. Physical function was evaluated using the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) (primary outcome), the Timed Up and Go Test and the Physical Function in ICU Test. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Short Form 36 Health Survey, version 2 (SF-36v2) and Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) Instrument. Data were analyzed using mixed models. Results: The a priori enrollment goal was not reached. There were no between-group differences in demographic and hospital data, including acuity and length of acute hospital stay (LOS) (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score: 21 vs 19; hospital LOS: 20 vs 24 days). No significant differences were found for the primary outcome of 6MWT or any other outcomes at 12 months after ICU discharge. However, exploratory analyses showed the rate of change over time and mean between-group differences in 6MWT from first assessment were greater in the intervention group. Conclusions: Further research examining the trajectory of improvement with rehabilitation is warranted in this population. Trial registration: The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12605000776606.

Background Several tests have recently been developed to measure changes in patient strength and functional outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU). The original Physical Function ICU Test (PFIT) demonstrates reliability and sensitivity. Objective The aims of this study were to further develop the original PFIT, to derive an interval score (the PFIT-s), and to test the clinimetric properties of the PFIT-s. Design A nested cohort study was conducted. Methods One hundred forty-four and 116 participants performed the PFIT at ICU admission and discharge, respectively. Original test components were modified using principal component analysis. Rasch analysis examined the unidimensionality of the PFIT, and an interval score was derived. Correlations tested validity, and multiple regression analyses investigated predictive ability. Responsiveness was assessed using the effect size index (ESI), and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated. Results The shoulder lift component was removed. Unidimensionality of combined admission and discharge PFIT-s scores was confirmed. The PFIT-s displayed moderate convergent validity with the Timed “Up & Go” Test (r=−.60), the Six-Minute Walk Test (r=.41), and the Medical Research Council (MRC) sum score (rho=.49). The ESI of the PFIT-s was 0.82, and the MCID was 1.5 points (interval scale range=0–10). A higher admission PFIT-s score was predictive of: an MRC score of ≥48, increased likelihood of discharge home, reduced likelihood of discharge to inpatient rehabilitation, and reduced acute care hospital length of stay. Limitations Scoring of sit-to-stand assistance required is subjective, and cadence cutpoints used may not be generalizable. Conclusions The PFIT-s is a safe and inexpensive test of physical function with high clinical utility. It is valid, responsive to change, and predictive of key outcomes. It is recommended that the PFIT-s be adopted to test physical function in the ICU.

The objective of the review was to evaluate and synthesize the prevalence, risk factors, and trajectory of psychosocial morbidity in informal caregivers of critical care survivors. A systematic search of MEDLINE, PsychInfo, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Scopus, PILOTS, EMBASE, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database was undertaken between January and February 2014. Citations were screened independently by two reviewers for studies that investigated psychosocial outcomes (depression, anxiety, stress, posttraumatic stress disorder, burden, activity restriction, and health-related quality of life) for informal caregivers of critical care survivors (mechanically ventilated for 48 hr or more). Data on study outcomes were extracted into a standardized form and quality assessed by two independent reviewers using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and the National Health and Medical Research Council Hierarchy of Evidence guide. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines were followed. Fourteen studies of 1,491 caregivers were included. Depressive symptoms were the most commonly reported outcome with a prevalence of 75.5% during critical care and 22.8-29% at 1-year follow-up. Risk factors for depressive symptoms in caregivers included female gender and younger age. The greatest period of risk for all outcomes was during the patient's critical care admission although psychological symptoms improved over time. The overall quality of the studies was low. Depressive symptoms were the most prevalent in informal caregivers of survivors of intensive care who were ventilated for more than 48 hours and persist at 1 year with a prevalence of 22.8-29.0%, which is comparable with caregivers of patients with dementia. Screening for caregiver risks could be performed during the ICU admission where intervention can be implemented and then evaluated. Further high-quality studies are needed to quantify anxiety, stress, caregiver burden, and posttraumatic stress disorder outcomes in informal caregivers of long-stay patients surviving ICU.